Development Diary - 10th of December
- Thread starter Trin Tragula
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I was specifically referring to what Hannibal did at the Battle of Cannae, where he succeeded in encircling a larger army with his smaller one.
Depend on what you would consider representing encirclement. Im pretty sure you can get Cannae like results if you stack Everything in your favor. Like a well lead army of experience units that counter the enemy units while the enemy army is poorly lead, made out of green units and have the terrain penalty as well you counter their tactic.
The combat system allow both armies to use up to 30 units at one time which mean numerical superiorty offers Little advantage above that Point which mean quality of the army become more important which allow a outnumbered army to massively defeat a larger army of worse quality.
I would add that a high atrittion should harm combat capacity of an army and even result in its scattering or retreat
Could be done but could cause issues with the ai and be annoying to the player so it should probably only be done if the whole supply and attrition system is redesigned to be something like HOI4 instead of city based.
Like if attrition was much rarer and dependent on cutting off the enemy supply lines I could see that be added but that seems quite doubtfull that that is going to be in, could be expansion material however.
I'm very happy to hear that some units are counters to others. The Romans used Velites and other light infantry very extensively against elephants given the Velites outmanuevered them, so I'm hopeful that elephant spam (or any other unit spam) won't be the meta.
That's an interesting point you made. It begs the questions: Will different unit types be needed to be recruited in order to best attack/defend the various types of units your opponent might have? Will the various unit types that are designed to counter other certain unit types render super stacks of a single unit type less effective and if so how much less effective will that super stack be?
It will definitely be interesting to see these various unit types in action.
Certainly. There have been plenty of units in real life like horse archers that were generally extremely situational and get an over-glorified reputation nowadays, so I worry some people might just spam them. I really hope that units like horse archers are very situation based and only work in very specific situations, but when in those situations, they are extremely effective. The devs should do something along those lines to discourage 'super stacks' as you've said. I hope that some units are more general purpose, like light infantry, while others are excel at a specific job/strategy while being terrible at other things.
Another thing I hope the devs consider is the way different strategies affect your own troops. It would be interesting that an overly offensive strategy might be more damaging to squishier troops in your own line while being slightly more effective if heavy infantry or the like do it.
A final thing that would be interesting is a bit of a hunch. If Imperator uses combat from HoI4 more or less, then cold and heat acclimation should be implemented. If someone wants to re-create Hannibal's march across the alps, units recruited in Africa/Spain should be slightly more vulnerable to the cold and suffer more attrition. At the same time, these same units should do slightly better in the same climate they were recruited in.
All this might be alot to ask as I have no clue whether you can code this stuff, but it would be interesting to see nonetheless.
Code:
archers = {
army = yes
assault = yes
is_second_rank = yes
enable = yes
maneuver = 1
movement_speed = 2
build_cost = 2
build_time = 45
light_infantry = 2.0
heavy_infantry = 1.25
cavalry = 0.75
warelephant = 1.0
horse_archers = 1.0
archers = 1.0
}In this example for modding purpose from an earlier dev diary, Archers would target a unit 1 position diagonally if i'm understandig correctly. It seems low to me.
What's the meaning/consequences of the tag movement_speed?
Will the secondary battleline go forward gradually as first battleline units rout or in a group after the limit of the skirmish phase?
What happens to first battleline remnant units when the second battleline goes forward?
Will the flank units engage from the start? or will they go forward with the second battleline?
About the archers example again,
Is a build_cost = 2 expensive or cheap? What would be the range of costs?
Its damage vs some units aren't specified, I presume because it's 1, but some other damages are needlessly set as 1, why?
Well , this is matter of balancing. Archer (and slingers) were not the artillery of the ancient world, their use was primary to reduce the cohesion of the main force.
None in combat, i's just the speed of the stack (or better the speed of a unit type, the speed of the whole stack is the speed of the slowest unit )
In EU:Roma, archers were cheap, I think in I:R would be the same
Last edited:
I've noticed that some traditions give a combat bonus (the plains fight with us - Gallic path), which unit characteristic (or characteristics) is affected by this bonus?
Unit moral decline rate while combat can be modded?
Btw, where's the mods subforum?
Thank you
Unit moral decline rate while combat can be modded?
Btw, where's the mods subforum?
Thank you
I will buy this game 
Wow. Previous combat made more sense with 2nd row being ranged row. Now really u need to set up ur archers to die ? Really or did i miss understood this ? If thats true thats crazy and makes no sense. Besides the fact that usualy during melee archers didnt shot unless tyranical leader said to shoot making casualitys for self.
The game dont have a backrow like in EUIV. Archers just like all other units will fight in the same row.
At first it was intended as that wasnt it . Now its just ssnd ur archers in front to die. Cool.
Archers are not like EUIV artillery. They are like cavalry or infantry but in Imperator: Rome each unit have its own strength and weakness such as Archers are great against infantry but poor against cavalry. So the idea is to pick the units that counter the units of the enemy army.
Tha
Ts seems wierd to me bc theres always scisors rock paper in army comparison. But archers have never been part of it since they role were to do initial casualitys to enemys not to use them as another unit on front lines. But i guess thats one way how to handle it. Just doesnt seem quite right. And sorry for apelling im doing this from phone.
More often than not, archers were skirmishers that either dropped their bows and joined the frontlines as regular fighters once battle was joined, or took on the role of auxiliaries to either support the frontlines or shore up weak points once battle was joined. They weren't exclusively archers.